Zoning study of Minneapolis Greenway worries some

A major zoning study for the area around the Minneapolis Midtown Greenway is within months of completion and may lead to zoning changes in about 1,500 parcels, reports the Southwest Journal.

Much of the planning involves previously approved plans — including the Uptown and Lyn-Lake small-area plans — to determine the changes, the paper said. But now that residents are seeing the outlook for their own properties, it’s creating what the paper calls “unease.”

Some worry about more renters in their neighborhoods, while others fear higher-density and taller buildings, the paper says.

City officials, though, say there’s no cause for concern. “It’s the implementation of a lot of plans that took years and years,” planner Amanda Arnold said. “It may seem fast, but it’s really a technical implementation measure. We’ve been planning along the Midtown Greenway almost nonstop for five years. We don’t feel this is a new concept for folks.”

One commenter says fear of change should be overcome:

“Why is it that so many Minnesotans describe 3 story buildings as “high density”?…Growth requires additional development in larger , taller buildings, re-zoning and planning for more traffic. Don’t let your small town attitudes and fear of change hinder our great city.”

Comments (2)

  1. Submitted by Henk Tobias on 10/17/2009 - 09:55 pm.

    “Don’t let your small town attitudes and fear of change hinder our great city.”

    There is a great documentary named “The Lost Twin Cities.” Dave Moore was the narrator. It illustrates very clearly what can be lost when the agents of change are left to run wild. Small town attitudes have a lot less to do with the “fear of change” than does a sense of history. Moving forward is fine, but let’s weigh the gains and losses carefully. Not that long ago advocates of change wanted to tear down the Stone Arch Bridge. I don’t know if small town attitudes saved it, but thank god something did.

  2. Submitted by Doug Cole on 10/19/2009 - 10:38 am.

    Just look at the motivation of the planners. Higher density equals more tax income. Now are the planners on the receiving side of this statement? Do they live in the neighborhood?

    Once again big money designs our lifestyle. I’m all for improvement but it has to include more than profits for the few.

    How about the park system as a model? Private ownership of lakefront property was, and is, a bad idea.

Leave a Reply